Impossible Burger

[disneychrista]

Not interested. I'm a meat eater and have no plans to change that.

But according to the In Death series by 2050 we are all going to be eating soy and "cow meat" is going to rare.

(no pun intended)

 

[DuskKodesh]

But according to the In Death series by 2050 we are all going to be eating soy and "cow meat" is going to rare.

Rare is how I like my meat!
(I'm so sorry. I didn't even intend to post again but I cannot resist a pun!)

 

[DeniseJH]

Rare is how I like my meat!
(I'm so sorry. I didn't even intend to post again but I cannot resist a pun!)

Saw that one coming from a moo-ile away! All right, that one was bad - mooving along....

 

[ronandannette]

I haven't tried it yet but would like to. I'll probably wait until they are available in grocery stores, which I understand will be sometime this fall. Cascadian Farms used to have a "burger" that I loved: "Better 'n Burger". I don't know why they went away. I want to try the Beyond Burgers too, just haven't gotten around to it yet. (I'm not a vegetarian, but I do get into the eating healthier thing every now and then.)

This article is pretty interesting in relation to the bolded. It makes a good point about not confusing these products with the benefits of actually eating more vegetables. Older-style veggie burgers which are basically just ground up vegetables and starches with flavour and spices are actually nutritionally superior to the new products that focus on mimicking the texture and flavor of meat.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/beyond-meat-impossible-burger-healthy_l_5d164ad1e4b07f6ca57cc3ed

 

[DeniseJH]

This article is pretty interesting in relation to the bolded. It makes a good point about not confusing these products with the benefits of actually eating more vegetables. Older-style veggie burgers which are basically just ground up vegetables and starches with flavour and spices are actually nutritionally superior to the new products that focus on mimicking the texture and flavor of meat.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/beyond-meat-impossible-burger-healthy_l_5d164ad1e4b07f6ca57cc3ed

Yes, that was interesting, thanks. I guess I'll be looking at veggie burgers if I want a healthy alternative, not just a substitute.

 

[vacationer1954]

They are cooked on the same grill as the animal based patties. Could be a bit of a problem for the vegetarians and vegans based on that alone.

Eventually, they'll be forced to actually do what they promise (cook those burgers on a separate grill). Until then, yes, it'll be a concern, though I think there are actually more than a few patrons who care more about reducing their impact rather than fixating on eliminating their impact entirely, and will be satisfied with being indirectly responsible for less cruelty rather than fixating on achieving an absolute elimination of it immediately.

 

[vacationer1954]

I don't get what "clean" is supposed to mean anyways.

There is no legal definition so it can be used whenever a retailer wants to provide a positive spin on something but can't use a more factual description like "hormone free" or "antibiotics free" or "grass-fed" or "pastured". The big problem with truly eating clean is that it is far more expensive if what you're eating is meat rather than vegetables. To pasture an animal and process it at a small processing facility instead of a CAFO costs at least five times more.

 

[Hikergirl]

Can someone explain the reason that eating less meat is better for the environment.
Does it have to do with the processing?

 

[disneychrista]

Can someone explain the reason that eating less meat is better for the environment.
Does it have to do with the processing?

Cow farts.

 

[RamblingMad]

Cow farts.

They don’t fart. Just saying.

 

[TipsyTraveler]

Can someone explain the reason that eating less meat is better for the environment.
Does it have to do with the processing?

I didn’t have a ton of time to search but thought this article did a decent job of giving an overview of the issues while citing sources if you care to read more in depth.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...le-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth

 

[DeniseJH]

They don’t fart. Just saying.

Oh yes they do!

 

[TipsyTraveler]

Oh yes they do!

I think @RamblingMad was referring to the fact that cow burps are the bigger culprit when it comes to methane production.

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/33/which-is-a-bigger-methane-source-cow-belching-or-cow-flatulence/

 

[DeniseJH]

I think @RamblingMad was referring to the fact that cow burps are the bigger culprit when it comes to methane production.

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/33/which-is-a-bigger-methane-source-cow-belching-or-cow-flatulence/

Lol, could be - but my husband grew up on cow farms and believe me, I've heard about cow farts!!

 

[bcla]

Can someone explain the reason that eating less meat is better for the environment.
Does it have to do with the processing?

The gist is that it takes far more resources to raise farm animals for meat than it does to grow an equivalent amount of plant matter. While a lot is pasture feed, there’s a huge inefficiency in using hay, corn, or other feeds to raise animals. I’ve heard as much as 10 times the resources are needed.

 

[WDWBarb]

The gist is that it takes far more resources to raise farm animals for meat than it does to grow an equivalent amount of plant matter. While a lot is pasture feed, there’s a huge inefficiency in using hay, corn, or other feeds to raise animals. I’ve heard as much as 10 times the resources are needed.

Yes. And basically, you are making tons of food to feed what ultimately becomes … food. It takes tremendous amounts of land, water, etc. The majority of antibiotics produced actually go into the animals humans eat. And yes, animals to ultimately create a lot of waste. Pig farms... you don't want to live near one.

It take 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, and 16 lbs of grain (enough to feed 10 people for a day). More than half of the water in the US is used for farm animals.

 

[ronandannette]

Yes. And basically, you are making tons of food to feed what ultimately becomes … food. It takes tremendous amounts of land, water, etc. The majority of antibiotics produced actually go into the animals humans eat. And yes, animals to ultimately create a lot of waste. Pig farms... you don't want to live near one.

It take 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, and 16 lbs of grain (enough to feed 10 people for a day). More than half of the water in the US is used for farm animals.

Maybe, maybe not. It would seem that reasonably credible experts on both (and neither) side of the issue have mixed opinions. And if you're thinking "well, those amounts are still vastly more than plant production" well, yes they are. But let's remember our 4th grade science - water used for anything is not lost - it's recycled.
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/activity-watercontent.htmlhttps://foodtank.com/news/2013/12/why-meat-eats-resources/http://www.meatmythcrushers.com/myt...gallons-of-water-to-make-a-pound-of-beef.html

 

[DLgal]

Yes. And basically, you are making tons of food to feed what ultimately becomes … food. It takes tremendous amounts of land, water, etc. The majority of antibiotics produced actually go into the animals humans eat. And yes, animals to ultimately create a lot of waste. Pig farms... you don't want to live near one.

It take 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, and 16 lbs of grain (enough to feed 10 people for a day). More than half of the water in the US is used for farm animals.

It takes 1900 gallons to grow 1 pound of almonds. And then companies grind up the almonds and mix them with MORE water and sell it as Almond milk, which has nowhere near the nutritional value of a pound of beef. So why aren't we boycotting almond milk consumption, if we are truly concerned about water waste?

 

[bcla]

Maybe, maybe not. It would seem that reasonably credible experts on both (and neither) side of the issue have mixed opinions. And if you're thinking "well, those amounts are still vastly more than plant production" well, yes they are. But let's remember our 4th grade science - water used for anything is not lost - it's recycled.
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/activity-watercontent.htmlhttps://foodtank.com/news/2013/12/why-meat-eats-resources/http://www.meatmythcrushers.com/myt...gallons-of-water-to-make-a-pound-of-beef.html

Water may be “recycled”, but it may be just going into the ground or into saltwater bodies. Of course some of that evaporates into clouds and comes back as precipitation. However, depositing that water in the ocean isn’t going to create any more fresh water. Not to mention all the side effects of waste such as the Gulf of Mexico hypoxic zone.

 

[WDWBarb]

It takes 1900 gallons to grow 1 pound of almonds. And then companies grind up the almonds and mix them with MORE water and sell it as Almond milk, which has nowhere near the nutritional value of a pound of beef. So why aren't we boycotting almond milk consumption, if we are truly concerned about water waste?

It takes about 2.000 gallons of water to produce a gallon of cow's milk. And, of course, lots and lots of grain.